My Town

City Council pursues draft climate action plan without energy saving ordinances for homes and businesses

By Jane Northrop

Pacifica Tribune Staff Writer

Posted:
03/11/2014 05:01:03 PM PDT

Updated:
03/11/2014 05:01:04 PM PDT

Pacifica's draft climate action plan (DCAP) was presented to members of the community and City Council at a study session last Wednesday. More than 40 people attended the meeting and spoke both in favor and in opposition.

Mayor Mary Ann Nihart said Pacifica is doing this work to comply with state laws. Laws have been set that reduce green house gas emissions -- 15 percent below 2005 levels by 2020 and further reductions by 2050, 80 percent below 1990 levels. In addition, current state laws are more stringent than Pacifica's green building ordinance.

Put together by city planning staff and a city task force, the DCAP suggested ways to comply with those state laws.

The draft plan focuses on the 2020 target while acknowledging the 2050 vision, said Amy Jewel, consultant with DNVGL, who presented the plan at the meeting.

The plan has set a goal for energy use and green house gas emissions reductions of 40 percent below 2005 levels for Pacifica. In 2005, and continuing to the present day, energy consumption grew as more people used more plug-in devices. Vehicle ownership also increased, said Jewel.

The plan refers to "smart growth" along Palmetto Avenue and other aspects of energy conservation that could be included in Pacifica's general plan, which is under review. Nihart said Pacifica could potentially compete for a larger share, 70 percent, of Measure A funds if transit-oriented housing was built in Pacifica.

Advertisement

Benefits, cost savings and feasibility were set as priority components for the plan.

The controversial part of the plan was the Residential Energy Conservation (RECO) and Commercial Energy Conservation ordinances (CECO). Those would require energy conservation upgrades during property title transfer.

If those components were removed from the plan, Pacifica's climate action goal would be adjusted down to 35 percent below 2005 levels.

"Ít should be noted that state requirements will likely include measures similar to those encompassed in RECO/CECOs within the next few years and already include steps in that direction by requiring commercial buildings to disclose energy use at time of sale," the staff report presented by Christina Horrisberger, of Pacifica's planning department reads.

Carlos Davidson, a Pacifican who chaired the city's Climate Action Plan Task Force, said the cities of San Francisco and Berkeley both have RECO ordinances that have saved homeowners a lot of money on energy costs.

"It would be another point of sale ordinance or the new buyer could make the improvements," he said.

City Council, however, decided to move forward with a climate action plan that does not include those ordinances for homes and businesses. They directed city staff to adjust the DCAP to accept the goal of reducing energy 35 percent below 2005 levels.

"I'm happy we directed staff to bring back a plan that aggressively lowers our greenhouse gas emission but also has no risk to increase homeowners' costs," said Councilmember Len Stone.

Councilmember Sue Digre, however, was very supportive of the plan as stated.

"This is well done. If we don't do this, we will lose out on permits. We should be as strict as possible. Have a committee examine RECO. Figure out what's best for everyone," she said.

Mayor Pro Tem Karen Ervin said, "People can do a lot without spending a lot. Let's combine a cap (on spending) with incentives."

Councilmember Mike O'Neill said, "Smart growth development can be done. A lot of what we are doing for the short-term goals have already been done. The mid-term goals are the harder part. Maybe meet halfway. Make a list of possible tax credits. If it's already mandated, put it into our ordinance.

"Make a column of all the things we've done. Move RECO to the long term. We have undersold solar. Let's get this done in an efficient way," said Mayor Nihart.

Near term measures include a water conservation ordinance, commercial recycling ordinance, solar grant development, "safe routes to school," which encourages more youth to walk to school, water conservation incentives, and improving public transportation, smart growth development and setting higher waste diversion goals. That will achieve 15 percent below 2005 levels by 2020.

Longer-term measures include creating a (CECO), establishing a zero-waste policy and having a preferred parking policy. That will achieve 40 percent below 2005 levels with all measures implemented.

It also calls for hiring a part-time employee to oversee the plan and report on greenhouse gas emissions every five years and to update green building regulations. The DCAP will be reviewed every five years.

Most people who spoke at the meeting favored adopting the current draft of the plan by Earth Day, as a symbolic gesture to the underlying principles. They all signed a petition to that effect for City Council to ponder. Others opposed parts of it, Most of the criticism focused on the RECO and CECO components.

Realtor Christine Stahl told council, "As a Realtor, I am concerned about a point of sale ordinance, but I also understand the importance of emissions control."

Joy Hitzman, another Realtor, said any point of sale ordinance would hurt people who are trying to sell their homes, especially senior citizens who are using the sale to build a nest egg.

Cindy Abbott countered that homes with energy upgrades will sell for higher prices.

Scott Findley said he was opposed to a point of sale ordinance.

"There are better ways to approach energy savings," he said.

Mark Stechbart opposed it. "Just put in the mandatory stuff. No one wants to tell a homeowner he has to spend $7,000 on energy upgrades."

Celeste Langille said she wants the city to embrace the guidelines of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District's (BAAQMD) strategies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions because transportation emissions account for 50 percent of Pacifica's emissions. The DCAP does not call for mandatory measures as the BAAQMD does.

"Transportation emissions are difficult to reduce without strong leadership on behalf of the city and with few other mandatory and enforceable measures in the DCAP, the deletion of the RECO and and CECOs from the DCAP would result in the DCAP falling short of BAAQMD's guidelines," she wrote in an official comment.

Ian Butler suggested the RECO improvements should fall on the home buyer, not seller.

Roy Ernst held up a stuffed polar bear at the meeting as a visual aid to draw attention to the far reaches of global climate change.

Pat Kremer agreed. "This is something we can do as individuals, but people don't always do the right thing voluntarily. Have incentives," she said.

Tom Cottrell urged council to explore solar heating opportunities.

"Some homes qualify for $0 cost solar installation," he said.

Besides the people who spoke at the meeting, there were comments both pro and con made part of the official record.

In a letter received from Paul Stewart, government affairs director of San Mateo County Association of Realtors, the components of a RECO could include installing water-efficient toilets and showerheads, faucet aerators, water heating blankets, hot and cold water piping, exterior door weather stripping, furnace duct work, chimney dampers, ceiling insulation and common area light bulb replacement.

Jewel responded that assuming costs for homeowners are capped at $1,500 or one-half percent of sale price, the average electricity savings would be $324 per home per year, natural gas savings $401 per home per year for a total savings of $725 per home per year.

The total utility cost savings for all businesses in Pacifica would be $13,200. Cost savings would be higher if utility rates rose by 2020.

Local residents Jack and Cindy Forbes wrote they opposed any point of sale ordinance.

"We feel this would be an unfair burden on the home seller, especially since there is a current sewer lateral ordinance," their letter read.

Dinah Verby, Pacifica Climate Committee, an independent volunteer citizens group, wrote, "City Council must exert strong leadership and resist the efforts of self-interested special interest groups to weaken the DCAP....Specifically, City Council should adopt the 40 percent goal for 2020 and also implement the mid- and long-term goals, including the passage of the RECO and CECO ordinances. The claim by special interest groups that such ordinances will adversely impact real estate sales is speculative and has not been proven to be true in the jurisdictions such as San Francisco and Berkeley that have adopted them. In fact, energy efficient improvements add to the value of property."

Ray Ramos wrote that better communication with the school districts to work on fewer vehicles on the road would be beneficial to include in the DCAP.

Planning Director George White expects to bring the next draft of the plan to City Council to adopt in two months.